Cheryl M. Sorenson v. Richard A. Batchelder
885 N.W.2d 362
Wis.2016Background
- On October 28, 2010, State employee Richard Batchelder caused a multi-vehicle collision that injured Cheryl Sorenson.
- Sorenson served a sworn notice of claim on January 18, 2011 by personal service at the Attorney General’s capitol office; the notice was processed and forwarded to the AG’s Main Street office and later returned to Sorenson’s counsel.
- The Bureau of State Risk Management paid Sorenson $241.45 for vehicle damage and sent a letter disclaiming liability or waiver.
- Sorenson sued Batchelder in May 2013; Batchelder moved to dismiss for failure to comply with Wis. Stat. § 893.82(5), which requires serving the Attorney General by certified mail.
- The circuit court denied dismissal (holding the AG received actual notice); the court of appeals reversed; the Wisconsin Supreme Court granted review.
- The Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals, holding literal certified-mail service is required and Sorenson’s personal service did not strictly comply with § 893.82(5).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether personal service of a sworn notice of claim satisfies Wis. Stat. § 893.82(5)’s requirement that the Attorney General be served by certified mail | Sorenson: literal compliance need not be required; personal service gave the AG actual notice and fulfilled statutory purposes (investigation, settlement, limits on recovery) | Batchelder: § 893.82(5) plainly requires certified mail; § 893.82(2m) mandates strict compliance, so personal service fails the statute | Held: Personal service does not satisfy § 893.82(5); strict/literal compliance is required and Sorenson’s claim must be dismissed |
| Whether a method of service that gives earlier or more reliable notice ("stricter compliance") can substitute for certified mail | Sorenson: personal service is "stricter" and more reliable than certified mail, so it should be treated as compliant | Batchelder/State: statute specifies the mode; courts shouldn’t rewrite legislative choice; allowing substitutes undermines uniformity | Held: Stricter methods do not substitute when the legislature specified certified mail; Patterson (different statute) is distinguishable |
| Whether substantial compliance (fulfilling statutory purposes / actual notice) suffices despite failure to send certified mail | Sorenson: actual receipt and processing by AG office show purposes were met; dismissal would be absurd | Batchelder: § 893.82(2m) eliminated liberal/substantial compliance; legislature requires strict compliance | Held: Substantial compliance is insufficient under § 893.82(2m); purposes fulfilled do not excuse nonliteral compliance |
| Whether enforcing literal certified-mail requirement would produce an absurd result that the court must avoid | Sorenson: dismissing a viable claim where AG had notice is absurd and unjust | State: no textual inconsistency or impossibility; certified mail remains feasible; avoiding the rule would undercut statutory certainty | Held: Enforcement does not produce an absurd result; the Court must apply the statute as written and not substitute its judgment for the legislature |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane Cnty., 271 Wis. 2d 633 (statutory interpretation begins with plain language; context and purpose relevant)
- Kellner v. Christian, 197 Wis. 2d 183 (strict literal compliance required under § 893.82)
- Kelly v. Reyes, 168 Wis. 2d 743 (regular mail did not satisfy certified mail requirement despite actual notice)
- Modica v. Verhulst, 195 Wis. 2d 633 (amendment to § 893.82 rejected substantial-compliance approach)
- Patterson v. Board of Regents, 103 Wis. 2d 358 (earlier statute allowed registered mail substitute; distinguishable)
- Hines v. Resnick, 338 Wis. 2d 190 (discusses AG receiving certified mail and statutory mechanics)
- Weis v. Board of Regents, 837 F. Supp. 2d 971 (E.D. Wis. decision holding personal service satisfied § 893.82; court rejected as unpersuasive)